Office Space

MOVIE TITLE: Office Space

DIRECTOR: Mike Judge

YEAR: 1999

GENRE: Comedy

RATING: R for language

GRADE: B

It feels weird watching this movie during the Great Resignation. Everybody in America is figuring out how bad their jobs are, so they’re leaving for higher ground. Monotony, low pay, uncaring bosses, lack of opportunities, these are all perfectly valid reasons to hate a job. The audience has no problem living vicariously through the main character, Peter Gibbons, who hates his white-collar job so much that he becomes an aloof slacker. What is he going to do for money? Well, that’s where you’ll have to watch the movie and find out. Whatever it is, it certainly won’t be crunching numbers at a pointless job. Building sympathy for the little guy is something this movie does well. It’s a shame it didn’t fare well at the box office, but its status as a cult film is more than deserved.

But if the movie is that good at making comedy out of a corporate miasma, then why am I giving it only a B grade? Surely, I could learn to hate work just as much as Peter Gibbons, Michael Bolton, and Samir…whatever his name is, right? As true as that might be, I only laughed a handful of times when I watched this. It could be my tapioca pudding brain malfunctioning on me. But if a comedy only makes me laugh a handful of times, then what’s the point? I did like Michael Bolton’s delivery as a character. I did like the courtroom dream that Peter had. I did like the…actually, I liked the…and wouldn’t you know it, my tapioca pudding brain with electricity inside can’t think of another instance where I let out even a little bit of a chuckle. Maybe my brain is so fried that I only have an appreciation for darker comedy, I don’t know. In any event, I didn’t laugh as often as I should have and that’s going to bring the grade down a notch.

But just because I wasn’t hee-hawing out of my chair, doesn’t mean I didn’t get any enjoyment out of watching this movie. Watching Peter, Michael, and Samir destroy a malfunctioning piece of computer equipment was so satisfying, considering my own Incredible Hulk rage towards such things. Watching Peter find happiness when he started the movie so miserable and out-of-body also made me glow like a light bulb. Listening to the gangster rap soundtrack to subdue Michael Bolton’s unfortunate name? Delicious piece of storytelling. There’s a lot of joy the average audience member can find in this movie. We’ve all had a condescending boss or teacher at some point in our lives. Rebelling against them is a fantasy everyone can enjoy no matter what level of work experience they have. “Level of work experience.” That’s a corporate buzzword if I’ve ever heard one. I’m sure Lumberg’s said that a few times off camera.

While the movie isn’t perfect by any means, it’s still appointment viewing for pretty much anybody who’s had it with corporate authority. Yes, the movie takes place in 1999 and might be a little dated in some places, but when has that ever stopped Mike Judge from predicting the future like he did with Idiocracy? Actually, he was off by 490 years, but hey, details, details. They matter about as much as a fraction of a penny. What does a fraction of a penny have to do with this plot? Watch it and find out. It’ll be yet another piece of anti-corporate satisfaction. I promise you. This movie gets four stars out of five, a B for Bureaucracy, and an 85% save progress bar. Seriously, you stupid computer, hurry up and save the files!

A History of Violence

MOVIE TITLE: A History of Violence

DIRECTOR: David Cronenberg

YEAR: 2005

GENRE: Thriller

RATING: R for violence, language, and sex

GRADE: A

A story about a diner-owner saving his establishment from a robbery would have been thrilling enough on his own. But where exactly did Tom Stall get his fighting skills from? It wasn’t just blind luck. He didn’t take martial arts courses. Maybe he was ex-military, but why would an ex-military guy suddenly have mafia goons calling him Joey when his name is clearly Tom? He’s hiding something, not only from the town that praises his actions, but also his own family. The growing tension between Tom and his family is a focal point of the story’s drama. The more that comes out about him, the more isolated he becomes from the one he loves. I was going to dock this movie a point for a sometimes slow pace, but that slow pace actually helps intensify the drama. Tension needs time to build. In the case of the audience, they’re going to feel all the hate and anger that Tom and his family feels towards the ones who wronged them…right before they implode on each other. If you have a history of violence, the cycle will eventually repeat itself. Building tension and sending anxiety through the audience are this movie’s strong suits.

But of course, you can’t call the movie A History of Violence and not have a good deal of violence in it. Tom Stall’s punches, kicks, and limb breaks are so brutal that they’re satisfying to watch as they happen to everyone who messes with his family. But the cherry on top of the blood-covered sundae came from Jack Stall, Tom’s son, who had been bullied all year at school by a redneck named Bobby and his friends. Jack just absolutely wrecked Bobby and it was so delicious to watch. As a former bullying victim myself, I love watching these kinds of scenes. Of course, Tom isn’t happy with how Jack handled it, because that’s not how his family solves problems…but Tom totally does as he slaps his son for smart-mouthing him. Pot, meet kettle. But that just widens the divide between Tom and his family, so blatant hypocrisy adds to the building tension that the movie does so well.

I won’t spoil the ending for everyone, so I’ll speak as vaguely as possible. By the time all is said and done, we don’t know if the main problem is solved. We don’t know if Jack will face repercussions other than suspension for the pounding he gave Bobby. We don’t know if Edie (Tom’s wife) can carry on with her marriage. We don’t know if Sarah (Tom’s daughter) will stop seeing monsters at night. But most importantly, we don’t know if this cycle of violence will continue or if everything falls apart. Normally, this kind of open-ended storytelling is ideal for producing a sequel, which I wouldn’t be against. But even without a sequel, this is effective storytelling because it leaves the audience with anxiety-inducing questions long after it’s over. They’re free to exercise their imaginations. It’s not even confusion they feel. It’s a genuine interest in seeing the story beyond its ninety-six minutes. By renting space in the audience’s head long after it’s over, A History of Violence truly did its job of telling an effective story.

Everybody played their roles to perfection. The violence was satisfying whenever it happened to the bad guys (Bobby included). The drama was never in a cool state even after those bad guys get their comeuppance. It started off slow, yes, but that’s something I’m willing to forgive since the rest of the movie kicked it into high gear with the action and drama. If you feel like your patience is being tested, keep watching it all the way through, because you’ll get everything you want and more…even if the ending leaves you with more questions than answers. A History of Violence gets five out of five stars.